CHRW vs UPS

For growth investors, United Parcel Service, Inc.

(UPS) is the stronger pick with -2. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -8. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (14. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) a "Hold" — based on 46 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

On trailing P/E, United Parcel Service, Inc.

(UPS) is the cheapest at 15. 3x versus C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. at 35. 5x. On forward P/E, United Parcel Service, Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: United Parcel Service, Inc. wins at 0. 42x versus C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. 's 5. 20x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, C.

H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) delivered a total return of +84. 1%, compared to -40. 0% for United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CHRW returned +163. 6% versus UPS's +44. 7%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), United Parcel Service, Inc.

(UPS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 90β versus C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. 's 0. 95β — meaning CHRW is approximately 5% more volatile than UPS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 88% versus 199% for United Parcel Service, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), United Parcel Service, Inc.

(UPS) is pulling ahead at -2. 5% versus -8. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. grew EPS 25. 1% year-over-year, compared to -3. 0% for United Parcel Service, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, UPS leads at -4. 0% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

United Parcel Service, Inc.

(UPS) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 3% net margin versus 3. 6% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UPS leads at 9. 6% versus 4. 9% for CHRW. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UPS leads at 18. 5%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.

By this metric, United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 42x versus C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. 's 5. 20x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 27. 9x for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. — 13. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UPS: 15. 1% to $115. 23.

All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.

United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS) offers the highest yield at 6. 3%, versus 1. 4% for C. H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW).

For long-horizon retirement investors, C.

H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHRW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 95), 1. 4% yield, +163. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CHRW: +163. 6%, UPS: +44. 7%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: CHRW is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; UPS is a mid-cap deep-value stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.